Lawshea v. State
803 S.W.2d 655, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 138, 1991 WL 7853
Opinion
ORDER
Movant appeals after the trial court dismissed his Rule 29.15 motion. His motion was not timely filed. Movant concedes that the Missouri Supreme Court has ruled adversely to his position on this issue in other cases. See Day v. State, 770 S.W.2d 692 (Mo. banc 1989), cert. denied sub nom. Walker v. Missouri, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 186, 107 L.Ed.2d 141 (1989). An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Lawshea v. State, 803 S.W.2d 655, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 138, 1991 WL 7853 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).
803 S.W.2d 655 (Lawshea v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Day v. State
770 S.W.2d 692 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1989)
Walker v. Missouri
493 U.S. 866 (Supreme Court, 1989)
Jacobowitz v. United States
493 U.S. 866 (Supreme Court, 1989)